The History behind Marijuana / Hemp

[KFC911]

Originally Posted by john70t

Cliffsnote:
We've gone through this in another thread years ago.

Fint asserts that the subject of MJ is in a category of it's own.
It may not be compared to anything else relevant today.
And it is highly dangerous.

The end.

This thread will be 50% fint posts just like all of 'em....how many pages is that other epic one now ?

Fint sez AF teens don't drink beer too

[stomachmonkey]

Originally Posted by john70t

Cliffsnote:
We've gone through this in another thread years ago.

Fint asserts that the subject of MJ is in a category of it's own.
It may not be compared to anything else relevant today.
And it is highly dangerous.

The end.

Honest ignorance?

Willfully obtuse?

Compulsive contrarian?

A combination of some, or all of the above?

[KFC911]

Originally Posted by Rawknees'Turbo

Ha ha! Since I'm prevented from reading PARF, apparently indefinitely, it's amusing to see these wanna-be PARF threads pop up over here.

They won't even let you read? Tell me more....schithead

Thin disguises rule.....fint doesn't...whew

[fintstone]

Originally Posted by john70t

Cliffsnote:
We've gone through this in another thread years ago.

Fint asserts that the subject of MJ is in a category of it's own.
It may not be compared to anything else relevant today.
And it is highly dangerous.

The end.

Cliffnote:

Sorry you still don't have a valid argument to counter with.

The fact that another harmful substance is legal means does not seem to be a reasonable argument to make another one legal. Perhaps you can make the case, but you have not yet.

Saying that something else also a bad thing but legal is not a very good argument to add one more bad thing...but rather, an argument to make that "something else" illegal.

It makes as much sense as the statement earlier that Chemo drugs were legal.

Cigarettes are legal, so lets make marijuana legal? Beer is legal...lets make heroin legal? Exact same argument. Obviously, the legality of one does not make any reasonable argument for the other. You can come up with better logic.

I certainly wish cigarettes were never legal...as the cost in lives has been enormous. The same with alcohol. It was just too hard to put those back in the box. It is not too late with MJ.

[fintstone]

Originally Posted by KC911

This thread will be 50% fint posts just like all of 'em....how many pages is that other epic one now ?

Fint sez AF teens don't drink beer too

In general, they do not. Contrary to your contention, the rules against underage drinking are very strictly enforced. There are always a few losers in any vocation that break the law...but not really that many. Drinking a beer is really not worth getting kicked out with a bad discharge. They can wait until they are of legal age like everyone else.

I really wish you would stop attacking military folks here.

[fintstone]

Originally Posted by stomachmonkey

Honest ignorance?

Willfully obtuse?

Compulsive contrarian?

A combination of some, or all of the above?

So you still really cannot make your case...and fall back on posting about me vice the topic?

Folks keep bringing this topic back to OT...but seem unable to bring any better argument. Studies show that one can expect about a 5 point loss of IQ if they smoked MJ heavily as a youngster...I wonder if that is why logic/debate skills of those advocating legalizing recreational marijuana seem so poor?

[Helix8]

"Studies show that one can expect about a 5 point loss of IQ if they smoked MJ heavily as a youngster..." what a fantastic statement

[john70t]

I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant and fill him with a terrible resolve.

[fintstone]

Originally Posted by Helix8

"Studies show that one can expect about a 5 point loss of IQ if they smoked MJ heavily as a youngster..." what a fantastic statement

Why is it fantastic? It is the truth. Maybe some folks can afford to lose a few points. Clearly, a lot cannot.

[KFC911]

Originally Posted by fintstone

....I really wish you would stop attacking military folks here.

Fair enough....I thought I was mocking some military expert's absurd contentions on "that" thread...like everyone else . I'll see ya back in PARF fint....sorry folks .

[gordner]

If that is the sum of your argument, it is not too relevant when you talk about legalization with a minimum age requirement, and realistically understand that legalization hurts the black market and makes it more difficult to get illicitly, ie underage.

[gordner]

As the government should not legislate anywhere it is not needed, the argument should not be why legalize, but justify the prohibition. People are allowed their vices, good and bad, and their freedom of choice should be impinged only when necessary. More people are negatively affected by a refined sugar diet than MJ, it is very difficult to honestly defend prohibition logically.

[fintstone]

Originally Posted by gordner

If that is the sum of your argument, it is not too relevant when you talk about legalization with a minimum age requirement, and realistically understand that legalization hurts the black market and makes it more difficult to get illicitly, ie underage.

There is already a minimum age requirement and from earlier threads, folks on your side of the argument tell me that schools are full of MJ and it is readily available to children. Making the use more widespread and the drug easily available would seem to make that problem worse. Additionally, it makes the job of catching a "pusher" much more difficult as possession would be quite legal...so one would have to witness an actual transaction.


If MJ possession is legal and it can be purchased legally, it provides any entrepreneurial adult the ability to procures (immediately) MJ (even on a whim) and sell it to children. He would not have to risk getting caught buying, possessing or have to purchase large amounts from dangerous cartel members to sell to children. Just go down to the local dispensary. Quick, clean, easy.

I have no data that would lead me to believe that legalization has done anything but help the black market...in heroin.

[fintstone]

Originally Posted by gordner

As the government should not legislate anywhere it is not needed, the argument should not be why legalize, but justify the prohibition. People are allowed their vices, good and bad, and their freedom of choice should be impinged only when necessary. More people are negatively affected by a refined sugar diet than MJ, it is very difficult to honestly defend prohibition logically.

Only when the vices do not impact others. Prohibitions on drunk driving, speeding, helmet laws...even seatbelts and catalytic converters all restrict personal behavior.

The fact that a soda is "bad" is not a rational argument for legalizing other "bad" things. It is an argument for prohibition of soda.

[scottmandue]

Yet another MJ post... one old curmudgeon clinging to the 'reefer madness' he saw in high school keeps posting

The other 99% of us are 'lets stop wasting money on this witch hunt'.

Yawn

[KFC911]

Originally Posted by scottmandue

Yet another MJ post... one old curmudgeon clinging to the 'reefer madness' he saw in high school keeps posting

The other 99% of us are 'lets stop wasting money on this witch hunt'.

Yawn

One last jab.....before fint corrects you btw.

Yer stats are way off....to be more precise....has anyone ever agreed with fint ?

99.992sumthin'%

[fintstone]

Originally Posted by KC911

Fair enough....I thought I was mocking some military expert's absurd contentions on "that" thread...like everyone else . I'll see ya back in PARF fint....sorry folks .

There are always people who break the law...as evidenced by the fact that they are kicked out for getting caught. But, since the circumstances are different (strong enforcement), I believe the occurrences more rare than the similar nonmilitary demographic (can only speak for the AF). Hence, the suggestion (in that thread) that making MJ use legal would not result in more use seems spurious to me...and the AF example shows just the opposite that the one that introduced it intended.

I don’t see how the military has any relationship to this thread (you brought it up for some reason) unless it has to with whether laws and fear of punishment have anything to do with preventing people from breaking the law. The punishment for underage drinking is a slap on the wrist for most...but the consequences are severe in the military...just as marijuana use. Increased penalties certainly reduce crime...although they cannot eliminate it. People are caught for breaking the law in the AF all the time as catching folks is a huge effort...with constant drug testing and every car is stopped at the gate and the guard is tasked with trying to smell each car for alcohol or MJ. Dorms are constantly inspected and cars are stopped regularly at the gates for random search. Only a total fool would break those laws and relatively few do.

Yes it was different back when the drinking age was 18. There were beer machines in the dorms...and many of the people that really didn't want to be in the military, but joined to avoid the draft, were willing to take risks that would end their service. Not so much these days.

[fintstone]

Originally Posted by scottmandue

Yet another MJ post... one old curmudgeon clinging to the 'reefer madness' he saw in high school keeps posting

The other 99% of us are 'lets stop wasting money on this witch hunt'.

Yawn

Just the opposite. When I was young, most studies concluded that MJ was relatively harmless. Now, with newer/better studies...we know better.

Much like cigarettes.

[fintstone]

[KFC911]

Fint....I ain't lookin' back like Seger...

You've changed your argumemt to "on base" or other bs....everyone chuckled.

Teens that are in the AF drink beer off base....always have, always will.

....dammmmmmit.....I'm gone